Debate contribution: Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Bill: Consideration Stage
Debate contribution by Dr Steve Aiken OBE on .
- MLA
- Dr Steve Aiken OBE
- Party at the time
- Ulster Unionist Party
- Date
- 4 November 2025
- Type
- Debate contribution
- Business
- Executive Committee Business
- Heading
- Deaths, Still-Births and Baby Loss Bill: Consideration Stage
- Assembly identifier
- Official Report component 5216438
Read the official Assembly record
Text
The Bill has to be dealt with in very compassionate terms, and I made my points clear when I was in the Committee, particularly when we were talking with those bereaved people who were dealing with the issue. This is a deeply sensitive and very touching issue to many, many people. It is important that we get this right, and the intent of the Bill so far has largely been going in that direction. Many Members have spoken very passionately and very clearly about their views on the amendments and the Bill. I do not want to delay Members, because much of what they said is what I would say anyhow. From our party's perspective, we will support amendment No 1 and then either amendment No 2 or amendment No 3, depending on which way they come through. I have a question about amendment No 4. I have been in a similar situation. Proposed new subsection (3A)(a) talks about:
"the name and sex of the baby and any other biographical information".
I feel quite uncomfortable about that and about supporting it, and that is for reasons that I do not wish to go into in the Chamber. It is something that I have been particularly noted on as well. I would like more clarity on amendment No 5, because, although I understand the sentiment that Mr Gaston and others in the Chamber expressed, I do not really get why clause 11(1) does not cover those areas, particularly 11(1) and 11(2), and how they cannot be interpreted in that way. Mr Gaston, maybe you would like to make an intervention to explain particularly how clauses 11(1) and 11(2) do not cover that — sorry; through the Chair.
Thank you, Mr Speaker. I will move on to amendment No 6. With your indulgence, Mr Speaker, I would like some clarity from Mr Tennyson. In his remarks in the Chamber, I think that he said that it would be 12 months, beginning with the day on which the Act receives Royal Assent, but it says "12 weeks" in the amendment. Is it —?
Thank you. Just for a bit of clarity there. Obviously we will not be supporting Mr Gaston's opposition to the schedule. We believe that the Bill needs to be given due consideration when it moves through to the next stage. My final remarks are to the people, and the bereaved families in particular, who came and gave evidence to us. It was both humbling and a privilege for Committee members to hear from them.
424 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.
Assessment
Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.
- Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.05 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
- None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
- Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.85).
- No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
- Subject area: Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues.
- The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.
This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.
Jev’s structured answers
| Question | Probability | Met? |
|---|---|---|
| Identity framing | 0.04 | No |
| Sectarian or communal antagonism | 0.02 | No |
| Cultural grievance politics | 0.02 | No |
| Dog-whistle messaging | 0.03 | No |
| Controversy escalation | 0.06 | No |
| Legitimate policy scrutiny | 0.85 | Yes |
| Overall judgement | 0.05 | At or below not-flagging threshold |
| Option | Probability |
|---|---|
| No identity-based framing (chosen) | 1.00 |
| Reports or questions it | 0.00 |
| Criticises or condemns it | 0.00 |
| Adopts it | 0.00 |
| Subject | Probability |
|---|---|
| Gender, sexuality, abortion and related social issues | 0.73 |
| No identity-related subject | 0.24 |
| Sexism, misogyny, ageism and other equality groups | 0.02 |
| Another identity-related subject | 0.01 |
| Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials | 0.00 |
Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:41 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.
Disagree with this assessment?
Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.